Feed aggregator

On 30 June, at the meeting of the European Union Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) the ambassadors of the Member States politically supported the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on protective measures against pests of plants. They gave the mandate to the Presidency to start the trialogue negotiations with the European Parliament.

From the challenge of Russia to the on-going tragedy unfolding in the Mediterranean to the persistent sense of economic drift, Europe finds itself at an inflection point. The disaffection of European citizens looms large, and institutions in Brussels are perceived as uninspiring and directionless. This leads to an uncomfortable but urgently necessary question: What is the point of the European Union?

Last autumn, Jean-Claude Juncker was widely hailed for the radical redesign of what he himself proclaimed a “last chance” European Commission, but after nearly nine months the outlook is hazy. So far, Juncker’s new commission has chiefly led to much confusion within the EU bureaucracies. It has disrupted the traditional matching of the European parliamentary committees with the commission’s directorates-general, and the prior structure in which directors-general reported to a single commissioner has turned into a hodge-podge of solicitations, responses and endless co-ordination between many members and vice-presidents of the commission.

Juncker’s aim was to clean up all the red tape, but the drive for better regulation has so far seen a move away from formal legislation towards soft rulemaking, which means recommendations, guidelines, comprehensive assessments or even no regulation at all. The decision to scrap legislative proposals left unfinished from the previous commission, notably the “circular economy package”, has raised hackles, many in the Parliament where the move is seen as an institutional attack.

“Last autumn, Jean-Claude Juncker was widely hailed for the radical redesign of what he himself proclaimed a “last chance” European Commission, but after nearly nine months the outlook is hazy”

This bad blood has spilled over into the commission’s 2015 work programme, which parliament has yet to approve. Some major initiatives have been launched – the digital single market, the energy union and Juncker’s infrastructure investment plan – but on the whole these so far lack meat. Clouding the commission’s early months of 2015 was the uproar surrounding the ‘Luxleaks’ revelations about tax holidays for Luxembourg-registered corporations and the subsequent debate at the European Parliament with the tensions it created. The European Council, meanwhile, has maintained a level of unity and activity on key topics, but EU member states too often continue to display parochial attitudes driven by national interests. All in all, the make-or-break EU with its much heralded institutional structure has so far been characterised by narrow expectations and great disorientation regarding Europe’s future.

The tragedy of all of this is that it comes at a time the European project faces troubling challenges that require concerted effort, bravery and most of all leadership, which have been lacking except at rare moments of emergency. This has been the case while Europe’s overall economy has moved from crisis to morass, with occasional moments of high-tension brinksmanship over “Grexit”, or the even more likely “Graccident”. The EU’s tendency has been to act quickly until a threat subsides at which point interest wanes. During the 2010-2014 EU mandate, under Herman Van Rompuy’s Council Presidency, this gap-closing was impressive and resulted in fundamental changes in the Union’s structure. Yet it is far from complete and sorely lacks drive. Where, for instance, is the finalised Banking Union?

This confusion reflects the worrying trend in Europe in which there is a growing reticence towards forming an ever-closer union while openness to the membership of “any European State” committed to the EU’s core values dims. Throughout the European project there has always been tension between the widening and deepening, but now both are waning. Juncker’s announcement before taking office that there would be no new membership for the next five years was significant. Although none of the candidate countries was at all likely to achieve membership before 2020, formally foreclosing this avenue sent a message as did the downgrading of the enlargement portfolio vis-à-vis the neighbourhood policy. These two ethics, the embrace of the idea of Europe whole and free and the push for ever-closer union, have propelled the EU and its successes. Without them there is a real danger of an unravelling of the European project.

“Looking beyond Europe, there is a new world emerging in which the EU’s place at the table, or that of any of its member governments, is not a given”

Europe’s hesitant mood is exacerbated by its daunting neighbourhood. Pundits solemnly note that the Union has gone from seeking to create a “ring of friends” to having to deal with a ring of fire, but this turn of phrase only in part captures the reversal in the EU’s relationships with others. It has gone from generous and benign but what is generally considered non-essential activities in its near abroad to a moment in which the events in the EU’s neighbourhood have a direct impact on Europe’s own internal dynamics.

In the EU’s southern neighbourhood, the disorder that now extends from Syria to Libya to Mali has fostered the spectre of domestic terrorism in Europe, and has also brought to the fore fundamental questions over identity and immigration. To the East, Vladimir Putin has not only created the menace of Ukraine sinking into chaos, but is also dangerously threatening the political and territorial stability of some EU member states. Moscow’s insidious attempts to weaken Europe from within by courting populist and eurosceptic political parties like Hungary’s Jobbik, Syriza in Greece and most openly the Front National (FN) in France are aimed at more than breaking EU unity over sanctions policy but at breaking the Union itself. For Putin has identified the most fundamental challenge facing Europe: political disaffection.

The rise of emerging powers has created self-doubt among Europeans about the role of the Union in the world. Seven years of austerity have brought much uncertainty about governments’ ability to fulfil their end of the social contract. High unemployment and the bleak outlook for youth in many parts of Europe, along with the general perception of growing income inequalities, are fuelling support for re-packaged old ideas, anti-system rhetoric and rose-coloured nationalistic nostalgia for bygone days. It has been seen in Syriza’s electoral victory in Greece, the growth of populist Podemos in Spain, UKIP’s ability to pull the Conservative Party to the right, the sudden rise in Germany of Alternative für Deutschland, the comeback of the former True Finns Party and the FN´s string of successes in French local and regional elections.

This constitutes a serious threat of dysfunctional government at a national level, but it also poses an existential threat for the European construction. People’s identification of the economic crisis with the European Union is near-universal. Germans resent the EU for funnelling their taxes into bail-outs for the southern eurozone countries, while Mediterraneans, epitomised by Greece, scorn Brussels for the hardships of austerity. Everywhere there is the view, however contradictory, that the EU has both done too much and too little. The bulk of the criticism is in fact well-founded, as the EU has acted slowly and insufficiently. But some is plainly undeserved: Brussels has too long served as a convenient scapegoat for national governments. Regardless of who is actually to blame, the economic downturn has seen the perception of failure firmly attaching itself to the European Union.

“Pundits solemnly note that the Union has gone from seeking to create a “ring of friends” to having to deal with a ring of fire”

Looking beyond Europe, there is a new world emerging in which the EU’s place at the table, or that of any of its member governments, is not a given. This requires a reset in the way that we Europeans think of ourselves, of the role we want to play and the strength of acting together.

The palpable sense of disappointment and insecurity in Europe ignores our many assets. We enjoy all the advantages of free circulation, peace and genuinely high social standards. In general terms, Europe has an educated, healthy and diverse population, the vitality created by innovation and research and a belief in the rule of law and human rights that is ingrained in its DNA. But Europeans have not recognised these strengths and do not know how they can be translated into a new global role. Thus the fear persists of a world that belongs to others, and in more concrete terms Europe’s economic and social systems remain unadapted. This represents a particular danger for the European project, because it has increasingly relied only on prosperity as the central justification for its existence.

It was not always so. The original impetus for European unity was peace. The Schuman Declaration opened with the exhortation: “World peace cannot be safeguarded without the making of creative efforts proportionate to the dangers which threaten it”. But with the early death of the proposed European Defence Community, and the Atlanticisation of security in the context of the Cold War, peace became less of a guiding force.

Prosperity – which was initially seen as a means – gradually became the end. The economic boom of the 1960s saw growth become a centripetal force within the shell of Cold War security. This was reinforced in the 1980s when, with François Mitterrand and Helmut Kohl’s backing, Jacques Delors thrust prosperity to the fore with his Single Market drive.

The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 saw Cold War fears evaporate, leaving Europe to generate its own momentum. A push for a distinct rationale for the EU gathered momentum in governmental corridors through elite-driven projects, notably institution building and enlargement, with an emphasis on shared values. But these efforts were not enough to generate a political centre of gravity, particularly among the broader public, that would be separate from the overarching goal of prosperity. Now, the blame for Europe’s faltering economy has been placed at the feet of the EU, with more than half of Europeans telling pollsters the lives of their children will be more difficult than their own. This begs the question: Why have the European Union?

Societies tend to mobilise around big ideas. This can, as in the Cold War, be a threat, or a cause as with the American civil rights movement. Or it can be a project, such as European integration at its inception. What we lack right now is just such a big idea. These are concepts that cannot simply be manufactured, there must be a match between a push forward and public yearning. This has been the central problem of recent attempts to coalesce public support at the European level, notably the ill-fated EU constitution. There was just not a perceived need, so the narrative faltered. But today there is a simmering desire for something to rally around, along with a sense of Europe’s disarray. In the absence of a clear vision of the future from Brussels or any of the national capitals, the overly simple and uncomplicated messages of populism or nationalism are enticing for Europeans.

There is nevertheless a hunger amongst many for inspiration that offers an opportunity for a visionary message that would strengthen the self-confidence and legitimacy of the European Union. There are openings, but they must be seized: recent events within Europe and its immediate neighbourhood should translate into a convincing narrative that Europe’s very real security threats can only be faced in common; or more broadly engaging citizens in an ambitious new drive that would fulfil Schuman’s vision of a Europe that is a beacon of peace and ideas for the world. But first it is necessary for European leaders in general, and those in Brussels in particular, to be more ambitious and brave and to look beyond narrow short-term interests.

The post Still no good news for the “make-or-break” EU Juncker promised appeared first on Europe’s World.

L’IHEDN dans le cadre de ses activités au sein du Collège européen de sécurité et de défense (CESD), a organisé un cours spécialisé ...

en lire plus

A Nemzeti Kutatási, Fejlesztési és Innovációs Alap pályázati kiírásán 55,46 millió forint vissza nem térítendő állami támogatást nyert el a XiMo Hungary Kft. A 142 millió forintot meghaladó összköltségű projekt során Mo- és W-alapú metatézis katalizátor kifejlesztése és innovatív kiszerelése valósult meg.

A projekt célja új típusú molibdén (Mo) és volfrám (W) alapú metatézis katalizátor kifejlesztése, ipari gyártásra alkalmas méretnövelt szintézisének kidolgozása, és innovatív formában kiszerelt prototípusának elkészítése volt.

A fejlesztés keretében a XiMo Hungary Kft. két, a piacon korábban még nem létező, egyedülálló, szerkezetileg és katalitikus sajátságait tekintve eltérő, ugyanakkor iparilag gazdaságosan hasznosítható Mo és W alapú fémkomplex kifejlesztését valósította meg. A fejlesztés során összegyűjtött ismereteket a vállalkozás ipari gyártásra alkalmas, méretnövelt szintézis kidolgozásában hasznosította. Az ily módon előállított, nagyfokú katalitikus aktivitással bíró fémkomplexek kiszerelésére olyan eljárást dolgozott ki, mely lehetővé teszi ezeknek az eredendően nagyon aktív, és ebből kifolyólag rendkívül érzékeny anyagoknak egy átlagosan felszerelt szerves kémiai laboratóriumban való felhasználását. A kísérleti fejlesztés eredményeként megszületet új kiszerelési forma felhasználóbarát, easy-to-use sajátságának köszönhetően jelentősen hozzájárul a tudományterület fejlődéséhez. Ahhoz, hogy az eredeti elgondolásból egy gazdaságosan gyártható széles vevői kört ellátni képes tömegtermék lehessen szükség volt egy, az újfajta kiszerelés automatizálását lehetővé tevő berendezés prototípusának kifejlesztésére is.

A fejlesztés eredményeként létrejött termék ipari felhasználás szempontjából kedvezőbb tulajdonságokkal bír, előállítási költségei és fajlagos felhasználási igénye kisebb lehet, mint a versengő termékeké, ami árelőnyt jelent. A termékek iránti kereslet elsősorban az alapvetően új kémia szerkezetek előállítását célzó multinacionális gyógyszeripari, agro és polimer cégek, illetve az innovatív projekteket kereső kutató szervezeteke részéről várható. Ezen túlmenően az is fontos motivációs tényező lehet, hogy a nagyhatékonyságú katalizátorok használata révén a már meglévő technológiák költséghatékonysága is tovább javítható.

A felhasználóbarát kiszerelés kidolgozása és piaci bevezetése lehetővé teszi, hogy a nagyhatékonyságú Mo- és W-alapú katalizátorok világviszonylatban elérhetővé váljanak mind a gyógyszer-, vegyipar, valamint az akadémiai kutatók számára.

Az NKFIA „Piacorientált kutatás-fejlesztési tevékenység támogatása a közép-magyarországi régióban” (KMR_12) elnevezésű pályázati kiírásán 55 464 647 forintos támogatást elnyert, 142 217 043 forint összköltségvetésű projekt 2012. december 1-én indult és 2015. május 31-én zárult.

The Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper) of the Council confirmed the agreement with the European Parliament on a new directive to limit the emissions of certain pollutants from medium combustion plants. These new rules are part of the clean air legislative package, which aims at improving  air quality in the EU. 

The Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper) of the Council confirmed the agreement with the European Parliament on a new directive to limit the emissions of certain pollutants from medium combustion plants. These new rules are part of the clean air legislative package, which aims at improving  air quality in the EU. 

The EU’s top judge has written to the European Parliament’s president to complain about an MEP involved in the long-running and increasingly bad-tempered attempts to reform the general court of the European Court of Justice.

As a recap, the number of judges in the general court is set to double from 28 to 56 by 2019. The court itself had initially asked only for an extra 12, to deal with an increased caseload. But when this proposal was sent to the European Council, member states nixed the idea because they could not agree which countries would get the extra judges.

The council kept blocking the proposal until they got what they wanted: a proposal of 28 judges — one for each member state. This has upset some within the court, who argue that they are already hacking through the backlog of cases and, in some cases, are actually underworked. On top of this, at €220,000 each – plus generous allowances – the extra judges are not cheap.

Antonio Marinho e Pinto, a Portuguese MEP who is helping spearhead European Parliament work on the proposal, has been making life awkward. In April, he invited a handful of judges who had been critical of the reforms to Brussels to address MEPs. Likewise, in June he circulated figures which showed that the backlog of court cases was less severe than had been portrayed.

This behaviour has displeased Vassilios Skouris, president of the European Court of Justice, who sent the below letter to Martin Schulz, the European Parliament president, to complain.

European Commissioner for Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Management Christos Stylianides visited the European Defence Agency today to exchange views and cooperation opportunities with EDA staff and top management.

The Commissioner started his visit with a meeting with EDA Chief Executive as well as the Agency’s top management, with whom he exchanged views on the EDA’s way of working, especially its role of interface with wider EU policies, as well as on current workstrands that might contribute to support Humanitarian missions and initiatives.

After the meeting, Commissioner Stylianides met with EDA project officers who briefed him on some of the Agency’s ongoing initiatives in the field of operations support, satellite communications or medical. Current EDA projects focusing on maritime surveillance, personnel recovery or airlift support to humanitarian missions were also discussed.

“A lot of activities and projects developed under the framework of the Agency have a potential dual-use role, and thus can be as useful in humanitarian missions as they are in high-intensity conflicts”, EDA Chief Executive Jorge Domecq commented during the visit. “As part of our close cooperation with the European Commission we stand ready to provide support  in areas of dual-use capabilities and dual-use research, while at the same time enhancing the pooling and sharing of capabilities”, he added.

• Link to Commissioner Christos Stylianides' website
• Link to EDA Operations Support project page

Jorge Domecq, Chief Executive of the European Defence Agency (EDA), and Massimo Garbini, Managing Director of the SESAR Deployment Manager (SDM) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). Its purpose is to establish efficient cooperation and support between the two organisations with regard to SESAR deployment.

“Europe’s military fleets include some 9,500 diverse aircraft accounting for more than 150,000 flights each year. In other words, they form the single biggest ‘airline’ operating in Europe today. The challenges of the Single European Sky programme and the modernisation of European air traffic management are manifold. However, it is the role of the EDA to ensure that the European air forces will continue to have free and safe access to European airspace for training purposes, air-policing, as well as air defence missions. The financial and technological impacts of the programme need to be mitigated to ensure that they do not adversely affect European defence capabilities. Only through constructive cooperation between military and civil stakeholders, our shared vision of an efficient, safe and flexible European airspace can be realised. It is in this spirit that we sign the Memorandum of Understanding today”, said Jorge Domecq at the signature ceremony. 

Massimo Garbini, “This MoU reflects the kind of relationship we aim for with all stakeholders. Only through efficient cooperation and mutual support between both civil and military stakeholders, we can deliver the modernisation of European Air Traffic Management technology together.”

The scope of the MoU covers the SESAR deployment of sets of functionalities in accordance with the relevant regulations1. The EDA and SDM will work together to support the Member States in translating the regulation into projects to be deployed nationally with financial support from the EU. The EDA will ensure that military viewpoints and needs are captured in the SESAR Deployment Programme and support the bidding and execution processes of the projects. At the same time, the Deployment Manager will coordinate with the military through the EDA to avoid any adverse impact on national and collective defence capabilities. This involves inter alia enabling and exploiting military contributions as well as optimising the use of expertise and avoiding duplications. The EDA and SDM also agree to put in place effective coordination procedures to ensure efficient synchronisation and the timely exchange of relevant information. A Steering Committee will be set up to ensure the effective functioning of the Memorandum.

The Single European Sky (SES) aims at realising the optimisation of the airspace organisation and management in Europe through a combination of technological, economic, and regulatory efforts. SESAR (Single European Sky ATM Research) is the technical pillar of this. SESAR involves developing a new ATM system to handle more traffic with greater safety and at a lower cost. Its new technologies and procedures will also seek to reduce the environmental impact of flying. The resulting efforts will be deployed in a synchronised manner involving all stakeholders, civil and military.

SESAR Deployment Manager (SDM) is the industrial partnership that synchronises and coordinates the modernisation of Europe’s air traffic management system under the political oversight of the European Commission. The main task of the SESAR Deployment Manager is to develop, submit to the European Commission for its approval and execute the Deployment Programme, a project view strictly drawn from the Pilot Common Project (PCP) set by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 716/2014, as well as any subsequent Common Projects in future regulations. Through the Deployment Programme, the SESAR Deployment Manager will ensure efficient synchronisation and coordination of implementation projects required to implement the PCP, as well as the related investments. The tasks of the Deployment Manager are described in Article 9 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 409/2013.

In order to ensure that the effects on military aviation are understood and taken into account, Member States entrusted EDA with the task of facilitating the coordination of military views from and in support of Member States and relevant military organisations and to inform military planning mechanisms of the requirements stemming from SESAR deployment. In 2014, EDA established a dedicated SESAR Cell to ensure that the military views and requirements are taken into account in the implementation of SESAR.

• Single European Sky project page
• SESAR Deployment Manager website

---------------------------------------------- 

1 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No. 409/2013 and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 716/2014

CCSERBIE - КУЛТУРНИ ЦЕНТАР СРБИЈЕ
info@ccserbie.com
www.ccserbie.com
01 42 72 50 50

CCSERBIE - КУЛТУРНИ ЦЕНТАР СРБИЈЕ
info@ccserbie.com
www.ccserbie.com
01 42 72 50 50